Photography is essentially a medium for expression. It expresses memories, thoughts, and feelings. But what drives the photographer? What drives the subject? What drives the spectator to take a moment to not only look, but truly see what the lens has captured? This question is one of many that has plagued Roland Barthes about photography. In attempt to describe, or perhaps define, these emotions that photographs conjure, he came up with the concepts off studium and punctum. These words, in Latin because he could not find a French word that would accurately describe what he was trying to convey, explain the relationship between the photographer, photograph and viewer.
When a person views a picture, he automatically has a reaction to it, albeit a detached (detached being the key word here) one. Thus enters the concept of studium: creating an interest in the photograph. During this initial viewing, the spectator enjoys and takes part in the photo, but on a superficial level. The details create what is viewed as a composition, nothing more. The viewer doesn’t absorb the elements of the photograph, he does not gaze at it with a passion. When passion is added, when an attachment (again, key word here) is created, the piqued interest enters introduces the concept of punctum. This concept occurs when there is a part of the image that jumps out and touches the spectator; because of this, punctum is often subjective to who is seeing the photograph. This elevates a photograph from being an interest to having a connection on a personal level. This element is clearly more compelling to a viewer and gives an image a certain quality that is often difficult to articulate.
In theory, the concept is relatively simple to understand; but, how would I find it in practice? Looking around the Sydney Mish
kin Gallery at the photos by Marcel Sternberg, one could argue that every picture contained an element of studium. One that I thought was especially interesting was this photograph of Albert Einstein. Clearly, one can understand the use of him as a muse; he was an incredible thinker and contributor to the world of mathematics. The image clearly depicts him in full regalia and bow-tie looking at the camera. But, as I looked at the photograph, something became quite intriguing: the expression in his eyes. As I looked, that expression jumped out to me like an arrow. I know this look, I’ve seen those expressions. Something Sternberg captured in the photograph touched me on a personal level, something attached me to this picture. Although I don’t know exactly what i feel a connection with, perhaps a distant memory, this concept of punctum was developed and it resonated with me quite deeply.
Although in a vastly different way, I believe that this photograph has the same elements as the Einstein portrait. Initially, when I took the picture, and now, when I look it again, the studium of the circumst
ance is quite clear. My camper had taken a phone and preoccupied himself for an entire bus ride taking selfies. When a person views the photograph, he sees a child looking at himself in the camera. But, when I take time to look at the photograph, I remember why it’s so poignant. My camper had discovered snapchat filters and was doubling over in laughter with shining eyes at himself with the doggie filter. He turned to me and said, “Gracie I look just like you!” Every time I look at this picture I see a smiling heart seeing himself in a different light, I see a connection, I feel an attachment. Of course the concept of punctum is subjective in this photograph. Someone can, correctly, argue that while its a nice photo, nothing jumps out and touches him on a personal level.
Ultimately, like everything we interpret, these concepts of understanding and analyzing a photograph through studium and punctum are subjective. What we see picture behind and visualize through the camera’s lens depends entirely on our personal circumstance. So, who am I to argue that something holds, or doesn’t hold, a connection to the hearts of everyone?
Your truthfulness exposed a lot about how you define studium and punctum. I thought you did a great job defining each as subjective by using a picture which showed another lens showing you openness to interpretation. Furthermore, when you said, “During this initial viewing, the spectator enjoys and takes part in the photo, but on a superficial level.” I thought that superficial is exactly what it is. Not fake but in a sense, not impactful which is what certain photos had on me. Thank you
I loved your photo at the end. Your explanation of studium and punctum regarding that photograph was so clear to me. You obviously connect punctum to this photo much more than studium since you knew the story behind that particular photo, while the rest of us may only see a child, yet again, playing on its phone and using different social media outlets. I agree, in that sense, that both studium and punctum are subjective.